Transition of governance in a mature open software source community: Evidence from the Debian case

As open source software (OSS) communities mature, they have to introduce a variety of governance mechanisms to manage the participation of their members and to coordinate the launch of new releases. The Debian community introduced new mechanisms of informal administrative control based on a constitution, elected leaders, and used interactive communication channels. We show that these control mechanisms were introduced as a response to emerging innovative opportunities due to the usage of source packages and to the need to build a responsive organization within the Debian OSS community.

[1]  Chris DiBona,et al.  Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution , 1999 .

[2]  Catherine C. Marshall,et al.  Designing Qualitative Research , 1996 .

[3]  M. Tushman,et al.  Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change , 1996 .

[4]  Nicolas Jullien,et al.  "Libre" software : turning fads into institutions? , 2003 .

[5]  Giampaolo Garzarelli,et al.  Capability Coordination in Modular Organization: Voluntary FS/OSS Production and the Case of Debian GNU/Linux , 2003 .

[6]  Mary J. Benner,et al.  Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited , 2003 .

[7]  J. Alberto Espinosa,et al.  Ambidextrous coping strategies in globally distributed software development projects , 2006, CACM.

[8]  Qinqin Dong,et al.  Strategic partnering with Chinese companies: hidden motives and treasures , 2007 .

[9]  Eric von Hippel,et al.  Satisfying Heterogeneous User Needs Via Innovation Toolkits: The Case of Apache Security Software , 2002 .

[10]  Martin Michlmayr,et al.  USENIX Association Proceedings of the FREENIX Track : 2004 , 2004 .

[11]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Coordination in software development , 1995, CACM.

[12]  Geert Duysters,et al.  Communication and Cooperation in the Virtual Workplace , 2006 .

[13]  W. Dugger The Economic Institutions of Capitalism , 1987 .

[14]  Anabel Marin,et al.  Foreign-owned firms and technological capabilities in the Argentinean manufacturing industry , 2007 .

[15]  George N. Dafermos,et al.  Management & Virtual Decentralised Networks: the Linux Project , 2001 .

[16]  Gaby Rasters,et al.  Communication and Collaboration in Virtual Teams. Did we get the Message , 2004 .

[17]  Howard Rheingold,et al.  Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution , 2002 .

[18]  James Bessen Open Source Software , 2006 .

[19]  Sami Asiri,et al.  Open Source Software , 2012 .

[20]  Karim R. Lakhani,et al.  Community, Joining, and Specialization in Open Source Software Innovation: A Case Study , 2003 .

[21]  Benoît Demil,et al.  NEITHER MARKET NOR HIERARCHY OR NETWORK: THE EMERGING BAZAAR GOVERNANCE , 1999 .

[22]  Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona Community structure of modules in the Apache project , 2004, ICSE 2004.

[23]  Josh Lerner,et al.  The Simple Economics of Open Source , 2000 .

[24]  Justin P. Johnson,et al.  Collaboration, Peer Review and Open Source Software , 2004, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[25]  Guido Hertel,et al.  Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel , 2003 .

[26]  B. Kogut The network as knowledge : Generative rules and the emergence of structure , 2000 .

[27]  Andrea Hemetsberger,et al.  Fostering Cooperation on the Internet: Social Exchange Processes in Innovative Virtual Consumer Communities , 2002 .

[28]  Robert E. Cole,et al.  From a Firm-Based to a Community-Based Model of Knowledge Creation: The Case of the Linux Kernel Development , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[29]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[30]  Alessandro Narduzzo,et al.  Modularity in Action: GNU/Linux and Free/Open Source Software Development Model Unleashed , 2003 .

[31]  Markus Pizka,et al.  The contribution of free software to software evolution , 2003, Sixth International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution, 2003. Proceedings..

[32]  Michael W. Godfrey,et al.  Evolution in open source software: a case study , 2000, Proceedings 2000 International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[33]  Eric S. Raymond,et al.  The cathedral and the bazaar , 1998, First Monday.

[34]  Georg von Krogh,et al.  Open Source Software and the "Private-Collective" Innovation Model: Issues for Organization Science , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[35]  Gregorio Robles,et al.  Evolution of Volunteer Participation in Libre Software Projects: Evidence from Debian , 2005 .

[36]  J. March Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning , 1991, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[37]  W. Richard Scott,et al.  The Organizational Life Cycle , 1981 .

[38]  Lee Sproull,et al.  Essence of Distributed Work: The Case of the Linux Kernel , 2000, First Monday.

[39]  Wim Vanhaverbeke,et al.  EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION IN TECHNOLOGY-BASED ALLIANCE NETWORKS. , 2007 .

[40]  W. Ouchi A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms , 1979 .

[41]  O. Williamson,et al.  Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. , 1977 .

[42]  李幼升,et al.  Ph , 1989 .

[43]  Lee Fleming,et al.  Penguins, Camels, and Other Birds of a Feather: Brokerage, Boundary Spanning, and Leadership in Open Innovation Communities , 2005 .

[44]  Larry Wall The origin of the camel lot in the breakdown of the bilingual Unix , 1999, CACM.

[45]  Roy T. Fielding,et al.  Shared leadership in the Apache project , 1999, CACM.

[46]  Siobhan O’Mahony,et al.  Managing the Boundary of an 'Open' Project , 2004 .

[47]  Charles M. Schweik,et al.  The Institutional Design of Open Source Programming: Implications for Addressing Complex Public Policy and Management Problems , 2003, First Monday.

[48]  Giovan Francesco Lanzara,et al.  The Knowledge Ecology of Open-Source Software Projects , 2003 .

[49]  R. Narula,et al.  States and firms on the periphery: the challenges of a globalising world , 2007 .